Ford Bronco overheating problems

Filed Oct 16, 2026 · CA

Infotainment screen went entirely black, causing a driver distraction and making vehicle features inaccessible. Rear camera works. Identical to current APIM overheating recall. Carson city ford has been unable to diagnose issue claiming software glitch or corruption. Dealer asking for out of pocket cost to “repair” with no resolution 4 days later while vehicle has been at dealer. This is a manufacturing issue causing consumer safety liability. Ford is responsible for cost and repair.

Filed Sep 24, 2026 · Driver assistance, Engine · 32,752 miles · AZ

The contact owns a 2023 Ford Bronco. The contact stated that the vehicle experienced an issue with the rearview camera while in use. The contact received a notice for the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 26V124000 (Back Over Prevention), and the recall repair was subsequently performed. However, after the recall repair was completed, a new 'overheating' warning appeared on the infotainment system. The vehicle was returned to the dealer, where technicians tested the system and confirmed that during a single operation, the system's temperature spiked from 93°F to 150°F. The contact confirmed that they received an overheating warning on the infotainment system display. The manufacturer has been notified of the failure, but the vehicle has not yet been repaired. The failure mileage was 32,752.

Filed Sep 22, 2026 · Engine · NV

The engine block may develop a coolant leak which could cause a short circuit while the engine block heater system is plugged in - increasing the risk of an underhood fire

Filed Jun 23, 2026 · Driver assistance · WA

The contact owns a 2024 Ford Bronco. The contact stated that on several occasions, the APIM overheated, and the rearview camera was inoperable. The VIN was not included in the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 26V124000 (Back Over Prevention). Additionally, the power windows and AC were inoperable due to the failure. The contact stated that the vehicle stalled due to the APIM overheating. The dealer was contacted, and a repair of the vehicle was pending. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown.

Filed Apr 13, 2026 · Electrical, Seats · OR

I am reporting unresolved safety recalls and unreasonable delay in repair for my 2023 Ford Bronco (VIN: [XXX] ). This vehicle currently has two open safety recalls issued by Ford Motor Company     •    the federal safety agency Recall 25V721 (issued October 2025) – seat frame defect that may increase injury risk in a crash. There is currently no available remedy, and Ford has notified me that a repair is not expected until April 2027.     •    the federal safety agency Recall 26V124 (issued March 2026) – APIM defect that may overheat and cause the rearview camera to fail while reversing, increasing crash risk. In addition, this vehicle has had prior recalls (25V025 and 25V273) that remained unresolved for extended periods. One of these recalls had no available repair for approximately 10 months. These recalls affect critical safety systems including suspension, rear visibility, and seat safety. The delay for Recall 25V721 is expected to exceed 18 months, which I believe is an unreasonable delay for a safety recall repair. Ford has continued issuing new recalls while prior recalls were still unresolved, indicating a pattern of repeated safety defects and delayed remedies. Due to these active recalls, I have been unable to use my vehicle commercially. Rental platforms such as Turo prohibit listing vehicles with open safety recalls. This has resulted in financial losses exceeding $80,000. This situation forces consumers to choose between operating a vehicle with known safety defects or suffering significant financial loss due to lack of repair availability. I am requesting that the federal safety agency investigate whether Ford is complying with its obligation to provide timely safety recall remedies and whether delays of this length are reasonable. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Filed Jan 31, 2026 · Brakes, Driver assistance · PA

Loss of braking. Note weather was cold in single digits Fahrenheit and midly snowy. I drove my 2025 Ford Bronco that was purchased in Octorber about 20 minutes to drop off my child at daycare. Going into the daycare I turned to Slippery/4A mode. After about 5 minutes inside I pulled out and switched back to Normal/2H mode. Less than half a mile later I got multiple warnings that the brakes, EBB, collision detect, and ABS had faulted, and I should service now. I only had the electronic parking brake available. I was able to use it and engine braking with my manual transmission to get to off the road to a parking lot, although I did also receive a parking brake overheat fault the turn before getting into the parking lot. I shut the vehicle off without the parking brake on. I turned it back on and the dash warning lights all disappeared after a few seconds. Brake function returned and I drove it to a Ford service center about 1 mile away. They were not able to reproduce the problem or find any DTCs. I did get notifications of some of the faults to my Ford app on my phone. I am uploading the redacted RO and screenshots of the Ford notifications. Losing braking obviously put myself and my passenger pregnant wife at risk. Thankfully I was moving at lower speeds on a flat section of road and not taking a highway exit at the time of failure.

Filed Jan 7, 2026 · Electrical · AL

I am writing regarding my new Ford Bronco vehicle, VIN: [XXX] , purchased in November 2024, currently with 7,151.5 km. I recently received Ford’s official notice advising that the engine block heater in this vehicle may develop a coolant leak which could result in an electrical short circuit when the system is plugged in. This is a serious manufacturing and safety defect that existed at the time of sale. Due to the nature of this hazard, I am not operating the vehicle, as it has been placed it on storage insurance. The vehicle has not been driven since receiving Ford’s notice in order to mitigate risk and prevent potential damage or injury. Under Manitoba’s Consumer Protection Act and the Sale of Goods Act, a new vehicle must be of acceptable quality, safe, durable, and fit for its ordinary purpose. A vehicle delivered with an admitted safety defect fails to meet these legal requirements. Accordingly, I am formally exercising my right to rescind the sales contract and cancel the related financing agreement. I am kindly requesting a full buy-back, including refund of all payments made to date, payoff of the remaining loan balance by Ford or the dealer, and the cancellation of the financing agreement with no negative credit impact. I would appreciate a written response from you within five (5) business days so that we may proceed toward a timely and appropriate resolution. Sincerely, [XXX] INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Filed Oct 30, 2025 · Brakes · NJ

I am writing to formally report a safety-related malfunction involving the parking brake system in my vehicle. The issue poses a significant safety hazard while driving and warrants investigation for potential design or manufacturing defects. During normal operation, the parking brake actuator malfunctioned, causing the vehicle to pull to one side and creating an unsafe driving condition. When I took the car to an authorized dealership, I was informed that the issue was due to a faulty parking brake switch. The switch was replaced; however, the malfunction persisted. Further inspection revealed that the parking brake motor and actuator needed replacement. Even after these repairs, while driving, the dashboard repeatedly displayed warnings such as: •“Parking brake engaged,” •“Please release parking brake,” and •“Parking brake system overheated.” When attempting to release the brake, the system would only disengage after manually pressing the release button, rather than automatically disengaging when the vehicle began to move — as it should. This malfunction not only causes confusion but also increases the risk of loss of vehicle control or brake system failure during operation. Given the repeated failures and persistent warnings, I believe this issue represents a potential safety defect that should be reviewed by your agency to determine if other vehicles are affected. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response and to ensuring this issue is properly addressed to prevent future incidents.

Filed Apr 18, 2025 · Electrical · 28,000 miles · PA · fire

The contact owns a 2021 Ford Bronco. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the electrical system and the engine seized. The contact noticed fire and smoke which exited from the engine compartment. The contact was the only occupant of the vehicle when the failure occurred. The fire department arrived and extinguished the fire. The vehicle was towed to the dealer. The vehicle was inspected and diagnosed with a faulty alternator. The contact was informed that the seized gears overheated the alternator motor, which caused the fire. The vehicle was repaired. In addition, the failure reoccurred. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the contact noticed smoke exiting the engine compartment. The vehicle was driven to the shoulder of the road. The contact stopped and parked the vehicle. The contact turned the vehicle off. The vehicle was started, however, the vehicle did not start. The contact stated several unknown warning lights were illuminated. The contact stated that when the failure occurred, the contact's wife and minor child were also occupants of the vehicle. The vehicle was towed to the dealer, where it was confirmed to have a failed alternator motor. The contact was informed that the alternator motor needed to be replaced again. In addition, the contact was informed that the seized gears in the alternator motor caused the fire. The vehicle was in the process of being repaired. In addition, the contact stated he was fearful of ever driving the vehicle again. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The contact requested a vehicle buyback. The failure mileage was approximately 28,000.

Filed Sep 17, 2024 · Transmission · CA

Front pinion seal leak is detected at where the front drive shaft meets the front differential. Ford attempted to fix it with a pinion seal replacement and the leak is still unresolved, second attempt was done by changing the front differential fluid which also did not resolve the issue. This issue is fairly common amongst bronco owners on forums and will be hard to come to the users’ attention unless the user checks under the vehicle so the problem may be more widespread than reported. The undetected loss of front differential fluid may cause overheating of the front differential over time as the fluid levels become low and potentially cause a lockup at high speed when the vehicle is used in 4A AWD mode. The leak can also be a fire hazard.